Kavanaugh Accuser reveals her Identity

[Anonymous]

I guess Trump doesn't see perjury as a blemish on anyone's record.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/407071-trump-says-kavanaugh-may-be-delayed

President Trump on Monday opened the door to delaying Judge Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court confirmation to look into sexual misconduct allegations, but predicted the process will "work out very well."

"If it takes a little delay it'll take a little delay," Trump told reporters at the White House. "I'm sure it will work out very well."

When asked if Kavanaugh should withdraw, Trump said it was a "ridiculous question" but added that he has not spoken with the federal judge about the accusations.

Trump was making his first public remarks since a woman came forward to accuse Kavanaugh of assaulting her when they were both in high school, an accusation that has raised doubts about the prospects for Kavanaugh's confirmation.

But the president left no doubt that he will stand by his nominee to the high court, calling Kavanaugh "one of the finest people that anybody has known" and claiming the judge "never even had a little blemish on his record."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McConnell is complaining that this was not brought up in a regular manner.

STFU McConnell, you didn't bring Garland up in a regular manner either.

McConnell is supporting the Grassley solution - conduct phone interviews outside of public light.

There is already a majority of the Committee and enough to kill the nomination that wants an open hearing.

I think McConnell knows this story is true and doesn't want an open hearing.

I will now expect this nomination be withdrawn. They should have done it before both Kavanaugh and Trump doubled down today. They will both look weak, and frankly, Kavanaugh likely should resign his DC Circuit Court seat.

They are allegations, not facts. It’s not at all clear that you know the difference.

I am the PP you are responding to.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I was relaying my opinion of facts on the ground related to the Senate process.

[Anonymous]

This guy didn’t meet his wife until his late 30s, right? Only a matter of time before a woman from his Yale days comes forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This guy didn’t meet his wife until his late 30s, right? Only a matter of time before a woman from his Yale days comes forward.

Their first date was the night before September 11, so he was mid-30s.

[Anonymous]

Has the party location been reported?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has the party location been reported?

If this sinks the confirmation, party will be at my house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has the party location been reported?

No. Kavanaugh is bluffing and GOP is letting him!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder the Republicans are trying to prevent Kavanaugh's accuser from testifying publicly.

Public hearings could be fraught, especially in a political year marked by surging female political activism and a surge of female candidates. No Republican women serve on the Judiciary Committee, and senior Republican men appeared ready to defend the nominee.

“I believe him,” Senator Orrin G. Hatch, a Utah Republican on the Judiciary Committee, told reporters after a private phone call with Mr. Kavanaugh Monday afternoon. Mr. Hatch said he saw “lots of reasons” not to believe Dr. Blasey’s accusation.

“He is a person of immense integrity,” the senator said. “I have known him for a long time. He has always been straightforward, honest truthful and a very, very decent man.”

“It would be hard for senators to not consider who the judge is today, because that is the issue,” Mr. Hatch continued. “Is this judge a really good man? And he is, and by any measure he is, and everybody who knows him says he is.”

The Anita hill hearings went on for weeks. This is the last thing Republicans want to dominate the pre-midterms period, especially with a credible professor as a witness. And people understand sexual assault, even if they don't understand Russia.

The optics on any hearings will not be good for the GOP. It's a lose-lose situation for them, especially right before midterms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Kavanaugh is playing duck and cover.

Senator Bill Nelson

@SenBillNelson
1h1 hour ago

I’m still waiting for a meeting with Judge Kavanaugh I’ve requested four times. I have a number of questions for him. Meantime, I agree there should be an investigation of the new allegations against him. I believe the people involved should appear before the Judiciary committee.

Kavanaugh has been holed up in the White House all day and they said he was calling Senators. Oops, looks like they've been caught lying again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder the Republicans are trying to prevent Kavanaugh's accuser from testifying publicly.

Public hearings could be fraught, especially in a political year marked by surging female political activism and a surge of female candidates. No Republican women serve on the Judiciary Committee, and senior Republican men appeared ready to defend the nominee.

“I believe him,” Senator Orrin G. Hatch, a Utah Republican on the Judiciary Committee, told reporters after a private phone call with Mr. Kavanaugh Monday afternoon. Mr. Hatch said he saw “lots of reasons” not to believe Dr. Blasey’s accusation.

“He is a person of immense integrity,” the senator said. “I have known him for a long time. He has always been straightforward, honest truthful and a very, very decent man.”

“It would be hard for senators to not consider who the judge is today, because that is the issue,” Mr. Hatch continued. “Is this judge a really good man? And he is, and by any measure he is, and everybody who knows him says he is.”

The Anita hill hearings went on for weeks. This is the last thing Republicans want to dominate the pre-midterms period, especially with a credible professor as a witness. And people understand sexual assault, even if they don't understand Russia.

The optics on any hearings will not be good for the GOP. It's a lose-lose situation for them, especially right before midterms.

Ted Cruz is on the committee. Just picture him trying to gently take apart the accuser's story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What exactly can she testify to? She can't say when it happened, or where it happened, or even how many people were there. How would you like to question Kavanaugh?

Do you recall an incident that happened 35 years ago or so, at a house somewhere in Maryland?

Uh, when exactly and where exactly?

I couldn't tell you where most parties I went to were held.

I have vivid memories of a friend being pinned against a wall at a GC party in Tanterra in the early 90s. No clue whose house it was or the exact address, but I remember the neighborhood and that it was a GC party.

I remember a pool party at a nice house somewhere in DC with Gonzaga guys. No clue when and where exactly.

I know about girls who were raped at parties--I was at one, but didn't hear about it until Monday at school.

And everyone has beach week stories.

And, that's the point. You heard about it. Teen girls don't keep this type of thing to themselves.

If you’d read this whole thread, you’d read about a dozen women who said they were raped or something like Kavanaugh’s attempted rape happened to them and they didn’t tell anyone.

And be honest: there is no circumstance in which you’d believe a woman anyway.

DP. I can remember several occasions in high school in which I was groped. It was unpleasant. But I would never dream of turning it into some sort of accusation - 30+ years after the fact, no less.

Everyone who walked across the dance floor at Tracks, 5th Column, Quigleys, Anastasia's, etc. was groped. NBD.

But that's not the same thing as being locked in a bedroom, pinned down and having your mouth covered as you screamed because a guy was trying to tear your clothes off and rape you.

You see the difference, right?

Yep - and something similar also happened to me. Again, I wouldn't dream of bringing it up more than 30 years later. Nope.

your apparent lack of self worth shouldn't bind the rest of us to accept an alleged sexual abuser getting a lifetime appointment to the sup ct where he will be responsible for making law and policy that affect us all, including women.

Actually, my strong sense of self worth is what told me that what happened to me did not define me in any way and was not something I needed to trot out DECADES later for the purpose of tanking someone's career with whom I disagreed politically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No wonder the Republicans are trying to prevent Kavanaugh's accuser from testifying publicly.

Public hearings could be fraught, especially in a political year marked by surging female political activism and a surge of female candidates. No Republican women serve on the Judiciary Committee, and senior Republican men appeared ready to defend the nominee.

“I believe him,” Senator Orrin G. Hatch, a Utah Republican on the Judiciary Committee, told reporters after a private phone call with Mr. Kavanaugh Monday afternoon. Mr. Hatch said he saw “lots of reasons” not to believe Dr. Blasey’s accusation.

“He is a person of immense integrity,” the senator said. “I have known him for a long time. He has always been straightforward, honest truthful and a very, very decent man.”

“It would be hard for senators to not consider who the judge is today, because that is the issue,” Mr. Hatch continued. “Is this judge a really good man? And he is, and by any measure he is, and everybody who knows him says he is.”

The Anita hill hearings went on for weeks. This is the last thing Republicans want to dominate the pre-midterms period, especially with a credible professor as a witness. And people understand sexual assault, even if they don't understand Russia.

The optics on any hearings will not be good for the GOP. It's a lose-lose situation for them, especially right before midterms.

Ted Cruz is on the committee. Just picture him trying to gently take apart the accuser's story.

oh wow. he's unlikable on his best days. that would put the senate seat in texas in the tossup column.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Susan Collins to @nytimes: “What is puzzling to me is the Democrats, by not bringing this out earlier, after having had this information for more than six weeks, have managed to cast a cloud of doubt on both the professor and the judge.”
“If they believed Professor Ford, why didn’t they surface this information earlier so that he could be questioned about it? And if they didn’t believe her and chose to withhold the information, why did they decide at the 11th hour to release it? It is really not fair to either”

Susan Collins for President 2020. This woman is sane, thoughtful, and moderate. She'd have my vote.

She's not perfect by any means. But rather her than most others, yes.

Looks like she will be losing her seat in the Senate in 2020.

Why do you say that? Because liberals are trying to bribe her to vote NO on Kavanaugh? God, you people are disgusting. I hope she doesn't cave to your extortion.

Wait, she takes hundreds of thousands/millions of dollars from big business and yet you are calling a fund created by thousands of small (under $100) donors a bribe?

Lady, I don't think you understand the term.

Lady, maybe you aren't aware they've raised over $1 million in their quest to make Collins vote their way. Try and keep up.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/12/activists-raised-million-defeat-susan-collins-if-she-votes-kavanaugh-she-says-its-bribery/?utm_term=.a3ff394a79e6

"At least one ethics expert consulted by The Washington Post said that it may very well violate federal bribery statutes, which prohibit giving or offering anything of value to government officials in exchange for any acts or votes. And Collins issued a sharply worded response through a spokeswoman that called it an attempt at extortion."

So the Washington Post found one expert to suggest this. But that doesn't make it so.

Just as one woman has alleged decades old sexual assault on the part of Kavanaugh. But that doesn't make it so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like Kavanaugh is playing duck and cover.

Senator Bill Nelson

@SenBillNelson
1h1 hour ago

I’m still waiting for a meeting with Judge Kavanaugh I’ve requested four times. I have a number of questions for him. Meantime, I agree there should be an investigation of the new allegations against him. I believe the people involved should appear before the Judiciary committee.

Kavanaugh has been holed up in the White House all day and they said he was calling Senators. Oops, looks like they've been caught lying again.

Be nice. It will take Kavanaugh time to invent a good cover story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a woman and a democrat and have been struggling with this a lot.

My first reaction is essentially, 'we will never know if this was true, and even if it is, how can we judge a grown older man based on one night when he was 17?'

And then I think, but ANY episode of sexual violence, something I would be shocked and incredulous if my husband or brothers participated in, SHOULD be a disqualifier from SCOTUS. And its not like Kavanaugh will go to jail or have his career ruined, he just won't be a SCJ and will instead go back to being a federal judge.

And isn't the fact that I think 17 year old boys are just prone to such incidents the WHOLE PROBLEM?

It has been a valuable incident IMO on how to wrap our minds around the entirety of the metoo problem.

Yes, it *should* be disqualifying, but only if it was proven. We can't just assume that it happened because some people believe that boys are prone to such incidents - you speak for the boys/men in your life, don't extrapolate to others.

+100